ONE PROBLEM WITH GUN LAWS
One Size Does Not Fit All
I think we all know how it goes when you find something that says “one size fits all.” (Especially pantyhose, for my fellow females). However, “one size fits all” is how gun laws are almost always phrased. Politicians never consider individual circumstances, nor are they willing to grant to regular citizens the protections they enjoy.
Gun Storage
The first problem area is gun storage. The legal options all basically wipe out any benefit a home-owner might have from purchasing a gun. When someone forces their way into your house or breaks in, you will never have time to unlock your locked gun storage unit AND then unlock the required separate ammo box before you and your family is put in harm’s way. Gun storage laws only make some degree of sense if you have young children in the house. But if you store your loaded gun high enough with no easy accessibility on the part of a child, you should be allowed to do that. And for older kids and teens, most gun-owners would have already taken their kids to the range and taught them safe gun handling.
Gun storage should only be an issue IF someone has left guns around for kids to find AND this results in a crime. Otherwise, it is none of the government’s business. The words “Congress shall make no law” mean what they say. The 2nd Amendment, as finally recognized by SCOTUS, means that we should be able to arm ourselves responsibly, including having loaded guns around to protect ourselves.
There are too many vulnerable people who need to protect themselves: the elderly, those with a handicap, the frail and of course, all the single women raising a family in a bad neighborhood. Their rights should not be infringed.
Many gun-owners have more guns than they need available, so, in that case, gun lockboxes make sense. But this should be at the discretion of the owner, not the government.
Criminals are not known for storing guns safely (nor, in many cases, even carrying them safely. How many times have you seen reports of someone who simply sticks a loaded pistol down the front of his pants?) Yet, have you ever heard of a criminal being prosecuted for unsafe storage of his weapons? Me, neither.
The only people benefiting from these laws are the people manufacturing gun safes.
Gun Rights and Choice
In CA, if a gun is attractive to women, forget about it. There is a new semi-automatic with a really easy to use, tip-up barrel. I saw it and called the manufacturer. I have a hard time racking back a semi, and thought this would be the solution. You guessed it – banned in CA. Many Blue states have rather short lists of allowable guns, which limits the ability of many of us to properly defend ourselves. I bet the Secret Service and private security have fewer restrictions.
People with various handicaps are more vulnerable to crooks and may need specially designed weapons that allow them to shoot and protect themselves. But that right is constantly being infringed. Silencers may seem cool to crooks, but in fact, they protect the ears of someone needing to shoot to protect themselves or others. Braces help those who can’t hold a gun properly (guns can be quite heavy).
Let’s talk about our rights. When open carry was banned in CA reasonably recently, people argued that since you couldn’t easily get a CCW, we are being prevented from exercising our 2nd Amendment rights, which is exactly what the governor wanted. However, there are a lot of hoops to jump through now, even post-Bruen, to get a CCW and it’s only good for 2 years. As well, it can take a year to get through the process. They also want to declare almost any area of “sensitive space,” so that you can’t carry there unless an owner specifically allows you to. That’s nuts. Again, it violates our rights.
Criminals and Laws
By definition, criminals don’t obey laws. Making new ones won’t reduce crime, especially as Lefty DAs are refusing to prosecute criminals who use weapons. We have over 20,000 gun laws on the books; more won’t make a difference, except to make the good guys more vulnerable to crooks.
We’ll only begin to be safe when DAs go after crooks for every gun law they violate, and stop persecuting the good guys. It seems that when you see defensive gun use, the cops go after every way to hurt the person who is defending themselves, rather than let the bad guy just die. (Cheaper too, no court case). And why do relatives of criminals get to sue someone who simply defended themselves? They should be barred from any civil suit.
I’ll consider the arguments of the Left the day they give up all their armed security up to and including the President. But we know that will never happen.
So many laws and rights being undermined because the anti-anything-we-don’t-think fits our narrative have learned to make those rights ineffectual through other laws and avenues. Everyone knows the true underlying reason for 2A but are willing to subvert it. I weep for America.
It is your right to own a firearm if you so choose. It is your responsibility to store a firearm safely.
It is not the governments place to dictate which firearm(s), how many, what magazine size, or accessories for them you can own.
It is not the governments place to tell you how you should store firearms in your own home, or on your property. That is your responsibility.
Fail that responsibility and someone gets hurt, yes there should be consequences.
Should the government offer suggestions on safe storage to the general public? Absolutely.
Should the government attempt to restrict where you can carry a concealed firearm? No.
Should the government focus on punishing violent crime offenders instead of wasting taxpayer time and money harassing law abiding firearm owners and continually trying to restrict a constitutionally guaranteed right? Yes.
I challenge anyone to prove any of these points wrong.